4 ms·
This is a really, really bad read. The point is that the data is built on the foundations of an enduring protocol, right now, and that if BlueSky were to pull s
by emptysongglass 3y ago
This is a really, really bad read. The point is that the data is built on the foundations of an enduring protocol, right now, and that if BlueSky were to pull some shenanigans it would be trivial for a user to pick up and move. The protocol provides a built-in incentive not to pull shenanigans.
Honestly, so many of the comments here are, but what if?? The what-if scenario is built-in to the design and is in fact more resilient than other protocols like ActivityPub.
- bushbaba 3y agoSocial media is more than the api and posts. It’s the active community. It’s not so easy to pickup and leave.
- sbierwagen 3y agoI think it's important to note that 1) The AT protocol is nowhere near complete, and as far as I can tell account portability is not actually implemented yet and 2) There are no third party sites that use AT! Even if account portability existed, there's nowhere to go. But if account portability existed and worked, imagine this scenario: Larry Ellison wakes up one day and decides that Elon is having so much fun that he wants a social media site too. The minute the sale is announced, all the account portability APIs are disabled, and the website switches to a hard login wall. They start aggressively throttling and banning users that look like scrapers. They send a DMCA takedown to archive.org, who obliges and removes the wayback copies. They disable viewing followers and following so you can't even get your graph out. Now what? The problem of trusting someone else to host your social media page is that you have to trust them. If your answer is "Jack wouldn't sell the company", then I can't help but note that he sure sold Twitter to Elon. If your other answer is "Larry Ellison would never do something unethical and customer-hostile" then uh...
- Zetice 3y agoThat would have to happen soon, and if it did, you'd be right. The vision of a decentralized social web would die again, and one billionaire would make another even richer. Some moaning would be had on the Internet, but the world would continue to spin. But, if the AT protocol even makes it another ~6 months without that happening, it will become impossible. You won't need to "trust" anyone to host anything, and if you want you'll be able to take your data and go somewhere else. That's the vision, and that's so far exactly what the folks at BlueSky have been building. So no, the answer isn't "Larry and Jack wouldn't do those things" the answer is, "They'll have to act very quickly and in ways that are completely out of character for them, not to mention the staff at BlueSky would have to all sell their souls which is also completely out of character for them as well." But yeah, if you're a cynic I guess everything is on the table.